Once upon a time, ESPN's Pat Forde said that if Michael Vick ever returned to football following his arrest for his part in an underground dog fighting ring, he would never be able to play at the same level he had played at in Atlanta, and that Vick's "time has come and is now going." John Clayton surmised that Vick's future might be in the CFL or Arena Football League. "Veteran NFL general managers" were openly doubting that Vick could ever make a significant comeback after sitting out for as long as he was going to. The general feeling was that Vick's career was as good as finished.
What a difference a few years makes.
After most of the media skewered Vick endlessly for his crimes, tearing down the once-revered quarterback who was supposed to change the game as we knew it with his unstoppable athleticism and speed, many pundits and commentators have done an about-face. It's impossible to deny that Vick has made an unprecedented comeback, guiding the Eagles to an unblemished 5-0 record in his full games and posting impressive numbers like a 108.7 passer rating (easily trumping his career best of 93.8, set last year during the first leg of his renaissance as a backup in Philly). But as is the media's wont, the reports of Vick's deification, to paraphrase Twain, have been greatly exaggerated. He has been one of the league's best players in the games in which he has played. But talking heads and so-called experts have been quick to point to Vick as, apparently, the frontrunner for NFL MVP.
It's easy to ascertain why pundits are making such an outrageous claim; aside from Michael Vick, this has been one of the most boring NFL seasons in recent memory from a football standpoint. The last undefeated team was downed so early that it barely seems worth mentioning. Illustrations of the league's parity make one wonder whether there is even a "best" team to watch in the NFL. And even with the predictable implosion of the Minnesota Vikings, the decline couldn't have happened to a less fortuitous team; much of the talk surrounding their troubles has centered on Brett Favre, and Lord knows people are sick and tired of hearing about him. Throw in the fact that no one really seems to be running away with the MVP trophy and that many of the best players are currently on underwhelming teams, and the media needs something legitimately fascinating to discuss. Enter the ready-made resurgence of Michael Vick, a tale that is admittedly quite profound and deserving of its attention, but that has nonetheless been blown out of proportion in typical fashion.
Here are the facts: while the Eagles have played 10 games thus far, Michael Vick has only started and finished 5 of them. In fact, if one were to glance at the stats and see Vick's 191 passing attempts next to Kevin Kolb's 153, one might think he was playing in some sort of tandem. Vick has 1,608 passing yards on the year, which is three more than Tony Romo (who has actually played one fewer game than Vick) and 168 fewer than Derek Anderson. His 11 passing touchdowns in 7 games is impressive, as is the ratio of attempts to touchdowns; Vick tosses a touchdown every 17.4 times he throws the ball. However, this ratio is actually somewhat middle-of-the-road compared with the other top QB's in the league. Phillip Rivers, who has thrown 353 passes this year and leads the league in passing yards and passing touchdowns, throws a touchdown for every 15.3 passing attempts. Matt Cassel throws one per every 16.2 attempts. And Ben Roethlisberger, who has posted similar passing numbers to Vick's in only 6 games since returning from suspension, posts a passing TD for every 15.6 tries.
That's not to say Vick doesn't have his arguments. His 11:0 touchdown to interception ratio is pristine; the quarterback with the next-highest number of attempts without an interception is Luke McCown, who has thrown 19 passes this year. And, of course, Vick boasts a running ability that, even with Vick on the wrong side of 30, has given him more rushing yards (375) and rushing TD (5) than any other QB in the league. Granted, he also has the most attempts (55), but his average of 6.8 yards per carry is excellent by any measure. In Vick's limited action, one could argue that, if anything, he has been the most dynamic player on the field, and he has carried his team to victory on more than one occasion.
So why can't I accept him as the current leading MVP candidate?
Without digressing into a discussion about various philosophies and semantics, I propose that there are two ways to think about the question of "the frontrunner for MVP" at this point in the season:
(1) The person who, if he continued playing like he has been for the remainder of the year, is most likely to be MVP
(2) The person who, if the season ended today, would be MVP
Both of these paths are flawed, of course, and perhaps that's an argument against ever bothering to discuss who is the MVP after only 10 games have been played. The first one is far too speculative, as a couple of bad weeks can completely derail an MVP campaign and there is no realistic way to accurately predict what the next six games will hold for any player. And the second one is somewhat meaningless, as while it may be legitimate to say that someone has been the best player up to this point, the discussion is just empty filler, as the tide of a brand new week will ultimately wash away whatever arguments had been made using the previous week's statistics and force the discussion to start anew, meaning any revelations reached from this analysis have a maximum shelf life of only 7 days. Still, if we're going to have the discussion at all, one could use either of these interpretations to reach the same conclusion: Michael Vick has missed too much playing time to seriously be in the MVP discussion.
Using the second interpretation first, an expansion of Vick's current statistics to a full season would mean that out of a possible 16 games, Vick has started and completed the equivalent of 8 games. Maybe if you include the time he's spent on the field while not playing a full game, we can be generous and increase that to 10 games. Even so, that means he has effectively played in only 63% of a team's games. How could he be the most valuable player to step onto the field that year? Using the first interpretation, even if Vick played every game from here on out, he would still have only played 11 complete games out of 16 when all is said and done. I'll even count the Week 1 game against Green Bay since he threw 24 passes in that one. He'd still only be at 12 games out of 16, or 75% of the season. Would you consider giving the MVP to a baseball player who missed 2 months? A basketball player who was out for 20 games?
I will admit that it's not impossible; if a guy threw for 5000 yards and had 40 touchdowns even though he only played 12 games, that would mean that he was probably just as valuable overall as anyone who played all 16. But when discussing MVP candidates, it's not about whether a guy has performed well in the games he's played-- the discussion of Vick's touchdowns in limited attempts above was more generosity than anything. It's about whether he has put up the best numbers over the course of the season, not the best numbers for someone who has only played x number of games. Otherwise, Chris Snelling should have had lots of MVP buzz in 2008 for impressively hitting a home run every four at-bats. And it's not even just about those numbers; one could argue that a player should be handicapped for missing that time. After all, that's 4 or 5 entire games where Vick gave his team no additional chance to win whatsoever. Wouldn't he have to play even better for the other 11 or 12 games to justify his nonexistent value in the games in which he didn't play? If there were a quarterback who did play all 16 games, but in four of them he was abysmal and got replaced by, say, Kevin Kolb because he was ineffective, would we ever be talking about him as an MVP candidate? If not, then why are we giving that privilege to Michael Vick, who spent four games riding the bench and contributing nothing while another QB jumped in, and even beat the 8-2 Atlanta Falcons, in his stead?
Looking at Vick's numbers, there are only two relevant things in which he even comes close to leading the league: QB rating and TD to INT ratio. Both stats are impressive, but both are qualitative statistics; any good statistician will tell you that he has an advantage due to his smaller sample size. Yes, he would also have a better chance of being below-average due to the sample size, but it's the same logic that might see a basketball team running a slowdown offense against a superior opponent; limit the number of chances for things to happen (in that case, possessions) and the result is more likely to be the opposite of what's expected due to natural anomalies. If they lose, like Vick, they were expected to anyway; if they win, it's an upset, the chances of which were engineered to be higher. And not all of Vick's qualitative stats are impressive, either; his completion percentage of 62.8 is just 14th in the NFL, behind such players as Chad Henne, Jon Kitna, and even teammate Kolb. His YPG of 229.7 is 22nd.
But since a true MVP needs to post MVP numbers overall, it's imperative to look at Vick's quantitative stats as well. Vick's 1,608 passing yards ranks only 25th in the NFL, and his 11 touchdowns is tied for 21st. The main attraction, according to many sportswriters, is Vick's ability to run, but it's been proven time and again that this skill is far less important in the NFL than it is in college. Vick has rushed for all of 375 yards this year; his total yardage of 1,983 yards would still only rank 21st in passing yards. QB rushing is a novelty in the NFL, and it's likely this aspect of Vick's game that has blinded pundits with smoke and mirrors.
And just as important as highlighting the shortcomings of Vick's statistics thus far is to identify that there are other players far more suited for the honor of MVP. Phillip Rivers leads the NFL in passing yards, touchdowns, and yards per attempt. Tom Brady has posted superior stats while leading a New England team that some had doubts about to an 8-2 record even though his best target was traded after a few games. Arian Foster leads the NFL in rushing yards and rushing touchdowns and is averaging 5.2 yards per carry. And while somewhat unusual, Green Bay's Clay Matthews has anchored a defense riddled with injuries and seems to be single-handedly holding the unit together, leading the NFL in sacks and helping the Packers somehow maintain the best scoring defense in the land. All of these players have played in every single game and proven their abilities over the course of the full season; in the weeks Vick missed, these players still shined. People are touting Vick because they mentally fill in the gaps and assume Vick's stats would have been just as good during his missed time. They may not have been, but more importantly, in reality, he put up no stats at all. Don't penalize those who have played all 10 games, and played well in each and every game, by elevating a player who has only played well five or six times this year.
By season's end, Vick may have put up numbers that make him impossible to ignore. But at this rate, he will only end up with 2,573 passing yards and 18 touchdowns. This is the NFL's most valuable player?
No comments:
Post a Comment